Android Developer Verification: Difference between revisions

(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)

Line 19:

==Introduction of Developer Verification==

On August 25th 2025, Google has released<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-25 |title=Android developer console {{!}} Android developer verification {{!}} Android Developers |url=https://developer.android.com/developer-verification |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250825180832/https://developer.android.com/developer-verification |archive-date=2025-08-25 |access-date=2025-08-25}}</ref> a roadmap of a new requirement for application installations called the Developer Verification, which will require developers to register on the Android Developer Console, if they want their applications to be installable after the roll out of this system. When registering, the developers are offered a choice<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-25 |title=Android developer verification {{!}} Android Developers |url=https://developer.android.com/developer-verification/guides/android-developer-console |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250825204008/https://developer.android.com/developer-verification/guides/android-developer-console |archive-date=2025-08-25 |access-date=2025-08-25}}</ref> between "Limited" and "Full" distribution types. The "Limited" distribution type is considered by Google to be best for "students, hobbyists, and other personal use", and is free to register, unlike the "Full" distribution type, which is considered to be suited for "organizations and professional developers with wide distribution". The "Limited" type is stated to have a "capped number of apps and installs", unlike the "Full" type. It is currently unclear whether or not the "Limited" type requires any kind of identity verification, as opposed to "Full", which requires full identity verification, as stated by Google.

~~===Google's response===~~

~~{{Ph-I-ComR}}~~

==Consumer response==

~~{{Ph-I-ConR}}~~Alongside the announcement, Google provided a Q&A page for existing developers to ask further questions<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-25 |title=Q&A: New Android developer verification requirements |url=https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/thread/361325854 |access-date=2025-08-29 |website=Play Console Help}}</ref>. There was a range of responses, some with practical questions about the implementation whereas others highlighting key flaws with the plans from both a consumer and developer perspective including:

Alongside the announcement, Google provided a Q&A page for existing developers to ask further questions<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-25 |title=Q&A: New Android developer verification requirements |url=https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/thread/361325854 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250829100055/https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/thread/361325854/%F0%9F%92%AC-q-a-new-android-developer-verification-requirements |archive-date=2025-08-29 |access-date=2025-08-29 |website=Play Console Help}}</ref>. There was a range of responses, some with practical questions about the implementation whereas others highlighting key flaws with the plans from both a consumer and developer perspective including:

*~~The~~ hypocrisy of enforcing security on side loaded apps (i.e. user installed apps not from the playstore) whilst Google's playstore ~~maintains its levels of~~ scamware, malware and adware.

*Android users highlighting the hypocrisy of enforcing security on side loaded apps (i.e. user installed apps not from the playstore) whilst they have observed Google's playstore distributing apps that could be classified as scamware, malware and adware.

*The ambiguity of the announcement leading some to conclude you would have to pay a one time $25 fee to install apps on your own device.

*Confusion over the requirement to register every package name before it can be installed leading some developers whom beta test multiple versions of the same app ~~to register huge slightly duplicated~~ package names.

*Confusion over the requirement to register every package name before it can be installed leading some developers whom beta test multiple versions of the same app by using different package names with problems about how they will be able to resolve this issue.

*The confusion over 'development version' apps being installed over ADB (a USB android debugging interface) and how they would persist and whether they need full verification.

*The confusion over 'development version' apps being installed over ADB (a USB android debugging interface) and how they would persist on device and whether they need full verification.

*The requirement of app signing thus potentially meaning installing apps requires an internet connection. This essentially bricks the functionality of devices that are intended to be used offline e.g. barcode scanners in supermarkets etc.

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 ==Introduction of Developer Verification==
 On August 25th 2025, Google has released<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-25 |title=Android developer console {{!}} Android developer verification {{!}} Android Developers |url=https://developer.android.com/developer-verification |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250825180832/https://developer.android.com/developer-verification |archive-date=2025-08-25 |access-date=2025-08-25}}</ref> a roadmap of a new requirement for application installations called the Developer Verification, which will require developers to register on the Android Developer Console, if they want their applications to be installable after the roll out of this system. When registering, the developers are offered a choice<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-25 |title=Android developer verification {{!}} Android Developers |url=https://developer.android.com/developer-verification/guides/android-developer-console |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250825204008/https://developer.android.com/developer-verification/guides/android-developer-console |archive-date=2025-08-25 |access-date=2025-08-25}}</ref> between "Limited" and "Full" distribution types. The "Limited" distribution type is considered by Google to be best for "students, hobbyists, and other personal use", and is free to register, unlike the "Full" distribution type, which is considered to be suited for "organizations and professional developers with wide distribution". The "Limited" type is stated to have a "capped number of apps and installs", unlike the "Full" type. It is currently unclear whether or not the "Limited" type requires any kind of identity verification, as opposed to "Full", which requires full identity verification, as stated by Google.
-===Google's response===
-{{Ph-I-ComR}}
 ==Consumer response==
-{{Ph-I-ConR}}Alongside the announcement, Google provided a Q&A page for existing developers to ask further questions<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-25 |title=Q&A: New Android developer verification requirements |url=https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/thread/361325854 |access-date=2025-08-29 |website=Play Console Help}}</ref>. There was a range of responses, some with practical questions about the implementation whereas others highlighting key flaws with the plans from both a consumer and developer perspective including:
+Alongside the announcement, Google provided a Q&A page for existing developers to ask further questions<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-08-25 |title=Q&A: New Android developer verification requirements |url=https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/thread/361325854 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250829100055/https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/thread/361325854/%F0%9F%92%AC-q-a-new-android-developer-verification-requirements |archive-date=2025-08-29 |access-date=2025-08-29 |website=Play Console Help}}</ref>. There was a range of responses, some with practical questions about the implementation whereas others highlighting key flaws with the plans from both a consumer and developer perspective including:
-*The hypocrisy of enforcing security on side loaded apps (i.e. user installed apps not from the playstore) whilst Google's playstore maintains its levels of scamware, malware and adware.
+*Android users highlighting the hypocrisy of enforcing security on side loaded apps (i.e. user installed apps not from the playstore) whilst they have observed Google's playstore distributing apps that could be classified as scamware, malware and adware.
 *The ambiguity of the announcement leading some to conclude you would have to pay a one time $25 fee to install apps on your own device.
-*Confusion over the requirement to register every package name before it can be installed leading some developers whom beta test multiple versions of the same app to register huge slightly duplicated package names.
+*Confusion over the requirement to register every package name before it can be installed leading some developers whom beta test multiple versions of the same app by using different package names with problems about how they will be able to resolve this issue.
-*The confusion over 'development version' apps being installed over ADB (a USB android debugging interface) and how they would persist and whether they need full verification.
+*The confusion over 'development version' apps being installed over ADB (a USB android debugging interface) and how they would persist on device and whether they need full verification.
 *The requirement of app signing thus potentially meaning installing apps requires an internet connection. This essentially bricks the functionality of devices that are intended to be used offline e.g. barcode scanners in supermarkets etc.